Image of the day

Captured by
Terry Wood

Jupiter (clearer) Nov 5th 2023 w/Mewlon 180c

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Beating a Dead Horse

Started by slick50, 09/14/2004 02:43PM
Posted 09/14/2004 02:43PM | Edited 09/14/2004 02:44PM Opening Post
Greetings all,

As I am sure, many of you are unaware of a debate that has been going on for a few weeks now on the Yahoo Groups. It involves issues of mirror quality between Zambuto and Torus and has spilled into an Obsession vs. Starmaster debate. As expected, these debates can become quite heated, although I think this one one has actually remained relatively calm.

First let me say that I recently purchased a 14.5" Starmaster that is suppose to ship today. I actually had decided not to get a Starmaster because of the premium price, but upon further research changed my mind.

Some things in the debate have bothered me very much. I tried posting something to the Obsession group, but it was apparently censured. My questions are the following:

1)If someone makes a quality product, why would they create a website that denigrates the products of others instead of simply emphasizing the qualities of their own product?

When shopping for a telescope I was taken aback by how much Obsession slammed, in a not so veiled way, other manufacturers. It actually was a factor in my deciding not to purchase an Obsession.

2) Ed Ting did a review of the 20" Obsession. He noted that it did not hold collimation during use. In fact, I think he stated that you would become a "collimation expert" by the end of the night. Obsession has since used the review on their website, BUT, they have editted out the section on collimation. Can anyone tell me why a manufacturer would post such a review and edit out only certain information? Hmmmmm. What does this tell us about the company and its owner?

Personally, I think there are many fine choices for individuals looking for medium to large dobsonians - including Obsession. We all benefit from this. But, as with most things in life, there are qualitative differences in the way in which certain companies, and people, conduct themeselves. While this is, as they say, life, it saddens me when individuals feel the need slam others to make themselves feel better.

In this case I think it is clear that there is a certain desperation and envy that provides the impetus for such conduct. It is the American way. When someone is very successful we attack them, not because they warrant such an assault, but because their success brings "our" own inadequacies into stark relief. That is to say, it is more about "us" then them.

Take care,
john

Posted 09/14/2004 05:04PM #1
John,

Regarding your point #1, I've read that stuff on the Obsession website and I always have to smile because it does come across kind of thick. I've always thought of it (and other aspects of the website) as a poorly executed marketing technique.

Matthew Sherman

I also think it's perfectly natural for people to be passionate and opinionated about their choice of manufacturer. After all, who's going to admit they made an expensive bad decision?!? But I think people should use more decorum
Posted 09/14/2004 05:23PM | Edited 09/14/2004 06:44PM #2
I'm not a libel attorney, but I'm not sure the internet is a place of public record. At least not legally. Maybe it is. If so, I love everyone, unless it's illegal.

I have been following the ZOC/Starmaster/Torus/Obsession threads as a Starmaster owner. Obsession certainly blasts someone's optics on their website, questioning their testing methods, published mirror data, mirror mounting methods and other such silliness. I call it silliness as they spend as much text denegrading the competition as they do espousing their own product. I'm not a big fan of that method. Wonder who they're talking about? Synta? Meade? Guen Sheng? Nah, he's talking about Carl Zambuto, and not very nicely, I must say. Up until this exchange in public, I had thought of Obsession as a pillar in the big dob pantheon. They didn't seem to have a product that required derogatory advertising to sell.

Carl rebutted on his Yahoo group stating that he thought the claims lacked merit and felt they were a personal attack on him and his business. His thoughts are not on the Starmaster website and he doesn't seem to care to make it so. Someone called his mirrors/methods/numbers into question and he's pissed about it.

I'll continue to watch and see where this goes. There is a side-by-side comparison brewing, sort of a clash of the Titans, that would be most excellent to participate in and interesting to read about. Not sure what it will prove, but I'd love to go back and forth between a big Starmaster and a big Obsession, over and over again, trying to see which was better. Put duct tape over the name plates and run a double blind test. At the end of the night, I'm sure the purpose of the test will be lost in the wonder of the views.

Tom
Posted 09/14/2004 11:28PM #3
The golden rule, "those with the gold, make the rules".

You exercised the rule by spreading your gold the way you did. That's the "American Way".

Posted 09/15/2004 01:11AM #4
hi,

I can't understand why someone who owns product x will denigrate product y rather then promulgating the good qualities of the product they own.

I would think the quality of the product produced by the premimum dob manufactures is excellent and what counts is that you are happy with what you have and not if it is perceived to be better or worse then something you do not have.

This perception of better or worse is exactly what marketing people use to get us to buy what we don't really need.

clear skies,

Larry Citro